well, actually, for someone to jog my memory. what was the final decision? am i allowed to add, say, a 1 pixel white, and then around that a wider black border? or has the whole border got to be a single color only? i know that discussion has been held before somewhere ...
this is what the rules say: "Borders: The photographer may add a border to a photograph if desired, but this border must be solid-colored and no text or other artwork may be added."
Well, my photo was DQ'd from the members challenge because it had ONE PIXEL OF WHITE to separate the border from the pic. So for now you can't do that as I found out the hard way. I would like this to be changed however or at least clarify the rule.
well, actually, for someone to jog my memory. what was the final decision? am i allowed to add, say, a 1 pixel white, and then around that a wider black border? or has the whole border got to be a single color only? i know that discussion has been held before somewhere ...
this is what the rules say: "Borders: The photographer may add a border to a photograph if desired, but this border must be solid-colored and no text or other artwork may be added."
thanks :)
the rule, as stated and as enforced, is single, solid coloured. No thin white lines with a black border, no drop shadows, no inverted, ripple effects.
I know it sucks to get DQ'ed for what seems to be a trivial violation of the rules. One of the reasons the rule was expanded upon was to minimise the DQs of people who had accidentally added a border due to inaccurate cropping.
The rule stands, as currently defined. I do sympathise with people who get DQed for minor deviations from the rules, but we try to be fair in that we stick to what is posted as the rules.
There was a discussion of allowing the contrasting 1-pixel border, but no decision to amend the rules. There is a link to the complete rules in several places, including on the submission page where you acknowledge reading and agreeing to them.
Please refer to the official rules page and go by what is there, not what people say in the forums, and less it is an official pronouncement from Drew or Langdon (Site Administrators) -- they are the only ones here authorized to make any exception to the posted rules or other terms.
Everything else, including this post, are no more or less than the opinions of the authors.
I'd like to make shots like Matt's legal, because I think his white border was nothing short of necessary. How should we word it? Think saying a 2 solid-color border is OK?
You could say something like "The photographer may add a border to a photograph if desired, but this border must be solid-colored, with the exception of a single-pixel line between the border and the photo. No text or other artwork may be added."
or just say that a 2 color border may be added as long as the inside border is restricted to one pixel in size. (forgive me for just combining everything you guys just said!) :)
i agree for the need for this for aesthetics sake, tho. as i look around my house, almost every picture is double matted, and it really makes a big difference in the final presentation!
So, why is it limited to one pixel? Either allow one color or two. If we're doing this so the photographer can enhance their presentation, and they think it needs a 3-pixel border, I say let them. Vote lower if you don't like it. I'd like to allow people to be as flexible as they want -- two colors are fine with me. They don't even have to be on both or all sides as far as I'm concerned...
It CAN make a huge difference in final presentation, and that is why I'm not totally for it. I think that we needed to allow some border so that so many accidental crops aren't being DQed. However, the focus should be on the shot and the more add-ons that we allow, the further we get from that.
So, why is it limited to one pixel? Either allow one color or two. If we're doing this so the photographer can enhance their presentation, and they think it needs a 3-pixel border, I say let them. Vote lower if you don't like it. I'd like to allow people to be as flexible as they want -- two colors are fine with me. They don't even have to be on both or all sides as far as I'm concerned...
Fully agree with what you said. Allow two solid borders of undetermined size, no add ons (dropshadows, etc). If you don't like it, vote it down. Yes, Greenem's vine shot has two borders. It made for a nice presentation and honestly nobody could say that those two borders made the shot. But they did give it a nice finishing touch.
I´ve said it before in another thread: For me it´s very important to be able to add a 2 solid-colour border. That´s the way I do all my photo-presentations outside DPC. If I want to take a chance with my border and people don´t like it - I get low score. But I have the possibility.
If we allow a 1px border to separate the image, will we have to DQ people with a 2px? Maybe they didn't realise it was a 2px or maybe they thought their photo needed 2px to look right.
We these photos be disqualified?
In my opinion this is just un-neccessarily over complicating the rules.
Here's a thought. At the moment DPC displays the images with a 1 pixel black border round them. So to get your two-colour border, you only need to add a single, lighter border to your image.
Of course this assumes you want a lighter border next to your image, and that 1 pixel of black is enough. ( I guess that allowing people to customise the DPC supplied border per image would be somewhat challenging techincally )
It CAN make a huge difference in final presentation, and that is why I'm not totally for it. I think that we needed to allow some border so that so many accidental crops aren't being DQed. However, the focus should be on the shot and the more add-ons that we allow, the further we get from that.
I am totally with Indi on this one. If you go to some of the other sites you see all kind of borders with two solid colors. Does that mean that if you have a border with 5 pixels of cream followed by 2 pixels of black followed by 5 more pixels of cream that it is legal or illegal? Two solid colors. It makes everything more open to confusing interpretation and possible wild borders as well. The best thing about this site is that the photo is the thing. The more you add the further you get away from that. I am for the rules as they stand. If you add another color it just makes it that much tougher to enforce the rules and to make mistakes that make folks mad.
I've been thinking of joining as a member to take advantage of the members only challenge and I would be encouraged if the challenge was left as wide open as possible.
I got the impression that the members challenge was a more advanced challenge and as such should allow more leeway for picture modifications.
i still think we should have no borders, but, since borders now are allowed, i would prefer to allow two solid color borders (and not just because that looks good on the picture that i want to submit). either allow what's commonly done (two borders, be the first one 1 px or something else), or don't allow borders at all ...
I think two colours should be allowed. Not sure what people mean by 'solid' though. Does 'solid' mean contiguous as well ? Can we have red and white candy stripes ? A white background with a black drop shadow is just two colours, but I doubt that is what people are meaning by 'solid' either. Does it have to be straight lines ?
I think specifying pixel line thickness is going to lead to no end of trouble and silly DQ's which was what this modification of the rules was trying to address.
On a different note - I'd like to see maybe a concurrent monthly 'no holds barred' challenge running - no restrictions to modifications, but the intent is to produce a 'natural' looking photograph. Might be interesting. Maybe should be members only ?
On a different note - I'd like to see maybe a concurrent monthly 'no holds barred' challenge running - no restrictions to modifications, but the intent is to produce a 'natural' looking photograph. Might be interesting. Maybe should be members only ?
